2 Links To Lions not Looters

These links refer to specific words that I use to oppose the Commemorative Coin proposal that I criticised in post #1 at http://liondocellis124.blogspot.com/2011/10/1-lions-not-looters.html

• looters,

1. The looters are promoting their looting with a stream of false advertising and mis-information. They are claiming one false rationale after another. They are making out like their looting is essential to American prosperity and employment. There is no basis for these claims. The looting is transferring wealth from those who have created it to those who have not. It is outright theft by government. There is absolutely no way that theft through such transfers can ever create prosperity or employment. [http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff285.html] Looting by U.S. Government at All-Time Highs by Michael S. Rozeff 2009.03.30
2. While Zeitoun was helping his neighbors, the police — including the officers who would materialize in his living room to arrest him on suspicion of "looting" — were helping themselves to whatever they wanted [http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w141.html] The Greyhound Station Gulag by  William Norman Grigg 2010.04.19
3. The American government consists of self-interested lobbies and Wall Street looters. China is run by engineers, America by lawyers.  [http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed195.html] The American Monkey Can't Let Go by Fred Reed 2011.01.13
4. But our one-party-with-two-denominations system can’t admit that. Both groupings have to come up with a tortured interpretation of the results to justify their continued exercise of exploitative power, taking from those who produce wealth — entrepreneurs and workers — and forking it over to those who haven’t produced it — largely parasitical, rent-seeking business interests (defense contractors, ethanol producers, agribusiness giants, et cetera), and a few others thrown in. [http://www.fff.org/comment/com0701c.pdf Bipartisanship? Bah! by Sheldon Richman 2007.01]
5. Looting is as American as motherhood, democracy, “freedom,” and apple pie. In fact, looting is the principle that undergirds America’s modern-day welfare state — the economic system that’s been in place since Franklin D. Roosevelt foisted it on the American people in the 1930s. [http://www.fff.org/comment/com0304w.pdf What’s Wrong with Looting? It’s the American Way! by Jacob G. Hornberger 2003.04]

• stolen money,

1.  Everyone recognizes that theft is theft regardless of the ends to which the thief employs the stolen goods. After all, if you want to donate to the Red Cross or buy yourself some food, you should be free to do so with your own money. No one, however, ought to have the right to force you to spend your money in ways that you do not desire. [http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/tennant4.html] A Thief in the Day Is No Better Than a Thief in the Night by Michael Tennant 2005.08.20
2. None of the free-market restraints against financial mismanagement apply to government. The federal government doesn't need to raise money by meeting a market demand or raising investment capital — it simply takes what it wants through taxes, which can be raised at will [http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul43.html] What About Government Accountability? by Rep. Ron Paul, MD 2002.07.18
3.  When we take money offered us by the state, in moral terms we are not taking back some of "our stolen money", rather we’re taking a slice of everyone else’s stolen money. You see, once that money has been taken out of our hands and placed in the state’s (idol’s) purse, it becomes tainted money.  [http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/friedrich1.html] Ill-Gotten Gains: Why Christians Shouldn’t Take Government Money by Hans Friedrich 2000.11.06
4. That is, the government owns nothing that it did not first steal from the people it rules, and its officials obtain and retain power by doling out these stolen goods to their constituents. [http://www.fff.org/comment/com0807f.pdf Honesty among Thieves by Michael Tennant 2008.07]
5. Is it morally permissible to use the force of the state to take money from a person to whom it belongs in order to give it to another person? Can a private act of immorality be converted into a moral deed simply by making it legal? [http://www.fff.org/comment/ed1099c.asp Has Compassion Gone Astray?
   by Jacob G. Hornberger, 1999.10]
6. Imagine if each time money was needed to provide something that most people wanted, you heard someone say, 'I know how we can get enough money, let's go out and rob a bank.' In such an instance, it wouldn't be necessary to point out the immorality of such a suggestion, which would quickly be dismissed as a joke. Why is it, then, when one considers the fact that governments acquire their money the same way bank robbers do -- by coercion -- that most people are willing to not only tolerate government theft, but to actively encourage it?

[ http://freeradical.co.nz/content/44/44lewis.php ] Forced Funding vs Freedom by Chris Lewis 2000


• gangsters, and

1. The inner circle of a gang consists of the gang's boss and his right-hand man. That's like a president and his closest advisors. The circle of gangsters widens to include the most experienced henchmen. That's like key officials and legislators. Then there are underbosses, gunmen, tipsters, flunkies, and lawyers. The state has bureaucracies, military leaders, and judges. [http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff126.html] The Sway of Interests by Michael S. Rozeff 2007.01.01
2. "And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." [http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/12819.html] Men with the Mentality of Gangsters by Thomas DiLorenzo 2007.04.27
3. The West requires conformity. It gets very uncomfortable with independent visions, independent visionaries, neutrals, and political systems, persons, and groups that do not link into and fall under its control system and alliances.  [http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/94176.html] The Big Gangster and the Little Gangster by Michael S. Rozeff on 2011.09.03
4. Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies? For what are robberies themselves, but little kingdoms? The band itself is made up of men; it is ruled by the authority of a prince, it is knit together by the pact of the confederacy; the booty is divided by the law agreed on. If, by the admittance of abandoned men, this evil increases to such a degree that it holds places, fixes abodes, takes possession of cities, and subdues peoples, it assumes the more plainly the name of a kingdom, because the reality is now manifestly conferred on it, not by the removal of covetousness, but by the addition of impunity. Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, “What thou meanest by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, whilst thou who dost it with a great fleet art styled emperor.” [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo#The_City_of_God_.28early_400s.29 ] The City of God by Augustine of Hippo early 400s

• threats of violent acts 

1. What if your local police department could shoot down a plane? What if government agents could write their own search warrants, declare their own enemies, and seize whatever property they want? What if the feds could detain you indefinitely, with no visitors, no lawyer, no judge, and no jury? What if they could make you just disappear? What if the government broke its own laws in order to enforce them? What if the government broke down your front door in the middle of the night and shot your dog, and claimed it was a mistake? [http://lewrockwell.com/napolitano/napolitano24.1.html] The Myth of American Freedom by Andrew P. Napolitano 2011.09.30
2. The answer to a few questions might help us understand who or what is the real threat. Who instills the most fear worldwide? Who maims and kills the most civilians and non-combatants? Who gains more power, control, and wealth, and benefits the most due to terrorism? ...the United States government, and those in the U.S. military who willingly do the bidding of the government by prosecuting immoral and aggressive wars and acts of hostility, and those who are partners in these crimes, are the worst terrorists in the world today! [http://www.lewrockwell.com/barnett/barnett30.1.html] Aggressive War and Terrorism Are One and the Same! So Who Are the Real Terrorists? by Gary D. Barnett 2011.03.21
3. The state is the central abstraction by which a catastrophically wrong idea is placed into practice. It is the organized system for employing violent action (or its threat) on the part of individuals, for as noted before, only individuals act. This rationalization occurs on two levels, first by diffusing responsibility to a fiction and second by inducing a group-think inversion of standards. [http://www.lewrockwell.com/calderwood/calderwood35.1.html] A Demon in Need of Exorcism by David Calderwood 2009.10.09
4.  It's important to remember what, in the final analysis, legal regulation is. It means that we are prepared to use force against the person who is the object of the regulation. It's easy to overlook this point because government actions seem so innocent in their initial stages. Usually they start with a letter or document ordering the person to appear at a hearing or trial, or pay a fine. But lurking behind this document is the threat of force. If the person chooses to disregard it, then G-men or state troopers with guns will eventually come to his home. If he ignores them or locks his door, the officers are authorized to use force against him. They may smash his door down; they may seize him and drag him away. If he attempts to defend himself, still more force will be used. In the process, the citizen may be injured or even killed [ http://www.server.theadvocates.org/freeman/920407.html ] How Many Laws Are Enough? By James L Payne 1991
5. (Reuters) - American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials. [ http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/05/us-cia-killlist-idUSTRE79475C20111005 ] Secret panel can put Americans on "kill list' by Mark Hosenball 2011.10.05

I hope these links provide insight to the foundations of my opposition to involving government folks in the Lions.

On a lighter note

The English language has some wonderfully anthropomorphic collective nouns for the various groups of animals.

We are all familiar with a Herd of cows, a Flock of chickens, a School of fish and a Gaggle of geese.

However, less widely known is a Pride of lions, a Murder of crows (as well as their cousins the rooks and ravens), an Exaltation of doves and, presumably because they look so wise, a Parliament of owls.

Now consider a group of Baboons. They are the loudest, most dangerous, most obnoxious, most viciously aggressive and least intelligent of all primates. And what is the proper collective noun for a group of baboons?

Believe it or not ....... a Congress!

Are you sure you want to entrust to such folks a task of promoting LCIF?

Yours in Lionism

Lion Doc